Evaluating anchorage and torque control in adolescent patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion among 3 appliances

The objective of this study was to compare the differences in anchorage and torque control among the Tweed edgewise, Roth, and physiological anchorage Spee-wire systems (PASS) appliances (Zhejiang Xinya Technology Co, Ltd, Hangzhou, China). A sample of 90 adolescent patients with Angle Class II Divi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics 2025-02, Vol.167 (2), p.166-176
Hauptverfasser: Chen, Huanhuan, Song, Guangying, Fan, Yi, Jiang, Jiuhui, Jiang, Ruoping, Zhang, Xiaoyun, Chen, Gui, Su, Hong, Wang, Tianyi, Han, Bing, Xu, Tianmin
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 176
container_issue 2
container_start_page 166
container_title American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics
container_volume 167
creator Chen, Huanhuan
Song, Guangying
Fan, Yi
Jiang, Jiuhui
Jiang, Ruoping
Zhang, Xiaoyun
Chen, Gui
Su, Hong
Wang, Tianyi
Han, Bing
Xu, Tianmin
description The objective of this study was to compare the differences in anchorage and torque control among the Tweed edgewise, Roth, and physiological anchorage Spee-wire systems (PASS) appliances (Zhejiang Xinya Technology Co, Ltd, Hangzhou, China). A sample of 90 adolescent patients with Angle Class II Division 1 malocclusion (30 Tweed edgewise appliances, 30 Roth appliances, and 30 PASS appliances) with maximum anchorage requirements in the maxilla were collected for this study. The pretreatment baseline levels of the 3 groups were compared initially, and then the differences between the 3 appliances in anchorage and torque control were analyzed after superimposing the pretreatment and posttreatment lateral cephalograms and maxillary 3-dimensional (3D) digital models, respectively. There was no statistical difference in the pretreatment baseline levels of 3 groups, including gender, age, sagittal skeletal types (ANB), vertical skeletal types (SN-GoGn), anchorage requirements, and occlusal plane inclination (SN-OP). After superimposing the pretreatment and posttreatment lateral cephalograms and 3D digital models, respectively, no statistical differences were observed between the measurement results obtained from lateral cephalograms and 3D digital models. Among the measurement variables assessed in this study, statistical differences were observed in the mesial displacement of maxillary first molars, the incisor retraction, and the torque variation of maxillary central incisors among the 3 groups. Specifically, the Tweed group exhibited lower mesial displacement of maxillary first molars compared with the PASS and Roth groups. Furthermore, the Tweed group exhibited the greatest amount of incisor retraction and torque variation of maxillary central incisors, followed by the Roth group and then the PASS group. The remaining measurement variables for the 3 groups showed no statistical differences, including vertical variation of maxillary first molars and central incisors, torque variation of maxillary first molars and canines, mesiodistal inclination variation of maxillary first molars and canines, width variation between maxillary first molars, and width variation between maxillary canines. Compared with contemporary preadjusted straight wire appliances, the Tweed edgewise appliance has superiority in molar anchorage control. In contrast, compared with the Roth appliances, the PASS appliances without any auxiliary anchorage devices could make full use of physiologi
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.ajodo.2024.09.005
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3117080280</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0889540624003822</els_id><sourcerecordid>3117080280</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1546-1546e68363d58f3c4848f1e4d658bd285c206ba966d5711bdab6857dc340dee03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM1u3CAUhVHVqJmmfYJKEctu7F7Mj_Eii2iapCNF6iZdIwxMwggbB-wZ9e3LZJIsu-FypXPu0fkQ-kagJkDEj12td9HGuoGG1dDVAPwDWhHo2kq0vPmIViBlV3EG4hx9znkHAB1r4BM6px0jDRNihQ43ex0WPfvxEevRPMWkH135WTzH9Lw4bOI4pxiwH7G2Mbhs3DjjqTjKzPjg5ye8DjpnvNngn37vs48jJnjQIRoTlpdVD7Hcp1hPU_AlxuUv6GyrQ3ZfX-cF-nN787D-Vd3_vtusr-8rQzgT1fFxQlJBLZdbaphkckscs4LL3jaSmwZErzshLG8J6a3uheStNZSBdQ7oBfp-ujulWOrkWQ2-VAhBjy4uWVFCWpDQyKOUnqQmxZyT26op-UGnv4qAOhJXO_VCXB2JK-hUIV5cl68BSz84--55Q1wEVyeBKzX33iWVTWFnnPXJmVnZ6P8b8A9wrJOS</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3117080280</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluating anchorage and torque control in adolescent patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion among 3 appliances</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Chen, Huanhuan ; Song, Guangying ; Fan, Yi ; Jiang, Jiuhui ; Jiang, Ruoping ; Zhang, Xiaoyun ; Chen, Gui ; Su, Hong ; Wang, Tianyi ; Han, Bing ; Xu, Tianmin</creator><creatorcontrib>Chen, Huanhuan ; Song, Guangying ; Fan, Yi ; Jiang, Jiuhui ; Jiang, Ruoping ; Zhang, Xiaoyun ; Chen, Gui ; Su, Hong ; Wang, Tianyi ; Han, Bing ; Xu, Tianmin</creatorcontrib><description>The objective of this study was to compare the differences in anchorage and torque control among the Tweed edgewise, Roth, and physiological anchorage Spee-wire systems (PASS) appliances (Zhejiang Xinya Technology Co, Ltd, Hangzhou, China). A sample of 90 adolescent patients with Angle Class II Division 1 malocclusion (30 Tweed edgewise appliances, 30 Roth appliances, and 30 PASS appliances) with maximum anchorage requirements in the maxilla were collected for this study. The pretreatment baseline levels of the 3 groups were compared initially, and then the differences between the 3 appliances in anchorage and torque control were analyzed after superimposing the pretreatment and posttreatment lateral cephalograms and maxillary 3-dimensional (3D) digital models, respectively. There was no statistical difference in the pretreatment baseline levels of 3 groups, including gender, age, sagittal skeletal types (ANB), vertical skeletal types (SN-GoGn), anchorage requirements, and occlusal plane inclination (SN-OP). After superimposing the pretreatment and posttreatment lateral cephalograms and 3D digital models, respectively, no statistical differences were observed between the measurement results obtained from lateral cephalograms and 3D digital models. Among the measurement variables assessed in this study, statistical differences were observed in the mesial displacement of maxillary first molars, the incisor retraction, and the torque variation of maxillary central incisors among the 3 groups. Specifically, the Tweed group exhibited lower mesial displacement of maxillary first molars compared with the PASS and Roth groups. Furthermore, the Tweed group exhibited the greatest amount of incisor retraction and torque variation of maxillary central incisors, followed by the Roth group and then the PASS group. The remaining measurement variables for the 3 groups showed no statistical differences, including vertical variation of maxillary first molars and central incisors, torque variation of maxillary first molars and canines, mesiodistal inclination variation of maxillary first molars and canines, width variation between maxillary first molars, and width variation between maxillary canines. Compared with contemporary preadjusted straight wire appliances, the Tweed edgewise appliance has superiority in molar anchorage control. In contrast, compared with the Roth appliances, the PASS appliances without any auxiliary anchorage devices could make full use of physiological anchorage to achieve adequate control of molar anchorage. Clinical orthodontists may need to pay extra attention to physiological anchorage. The difference in torque control varies depending on the respective characteristics of bracket designs. •The Tweed edgewise appliances offer superior molar anchorage control.•The PASS appliances achieve similar anchorage control efficacy as the Roth appliances.•Torque control differences depend on bracket design characteristics.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0889-5406</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1097-6752</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-6752</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2024.09.005</identifier><identifier>PMID: 39412466</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Cephalometry ; Child ; Female ; Humans ; Imaging, Three-Dimensional - methods ; Incisor ; Male ; Malocclusion, Angle Class II - therapy ; Maxilla ; Orthodontic Anchorage Procedures - instrumentation ; Orthodontic Anchorage Procedures - methods ; Orthodontic Appliance Design ; Orthodontic Wires ; Tooth Movement Techniques - instrumentation ; Tooth Movement Techniques - methods ; Torque</subject><ispartof>American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics, 2025-02, Vol.167 (2), p.166-176</ispartof><rights>2024 American Association of Orthodontists</rights><rights>Copyright © 2024 American Association of Orthodontists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1546-1546e68363d58f3c4848f1e4d658bd285c206ba966d5711bdab6857dc340dee03</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889540624003822$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39412466$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chen, Huanhuan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Song, Guangying</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fan, Yi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jiang, Jiuhui</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jiang, Ruoping</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Xiaoyun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Gui</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Su, Hong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Tianyi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Han, Bing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, Tianmin</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluating anchorage and torque control in adolescent patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion among 3 appliances</title><title>American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics</title><addtitle>Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop</addtitle><description>The objective of this study was to compare the differences in anchorage and torque control among the Tweed edgewise, Roth, and physiological anchorage Spee-wire systems (PASS) appliances (Zhejiang Xinya Technology Co, Ltd, Hangzhou, China). A sample of 90 adolescent patients with Angle Class II Division 1 malocclusion (30 Tweed edgewise appliances, 30 Roth appliances, and 30 PASS appliances) with maximum anchorage requirements in the maxilla were collected for this study. The pretreatment baseline levels of the 3 groups were compared initially, and then the differences between the 3 appliances in anchorage and torque control were analyzed after superimposing the pretreatment and posttreatment lateral cephalograms and maxillary 3-dimensional (3D) digital models, respectively. There was no statistical difference in the pretreatment baseline levels of 3 groups, including gender, age, sagittal skeletal types (ANB), vertical skeletal types (SN-GoGn), anchorage requirements, and occlusal plane inclination (SN-OP). After superimposing the pretreatment and posttreatment lateral cephalograms and 3D digital models, respectively, no statistical differences were observed between the measurement results obtained from lateral cephalograms and 3D digital models. Among the measurement variables assessed in this study, statistical differences were observed in the mesial displacement of maxillary first molars, the incisor retraction, and the torque variation of maxillary central incisors among the 3 groups. Specifically, the Tweed group exhibited lower mesial displacement of maxillary first molars compared with the PASS and Roth groups. Furthermore, the Tweed group exhibited the greatest amount of incisor retraction and torque variation of maxillary central incisors, followed by the Roth group and then the PASS group. The remaining measurement variables for the 3 groups showed no statistical differences, including vertical variation of maxillary first molars and central incisors, torque variation of maxillary first molars and canines, mesiodistal inclination variation of maxillary first molars and canines, width variation between maxillary first molars, and width variation between maxillary canines. Compared with contemporary preadjusted straight wire appliances, the Tweed edgewise appliance has superiority in molar anchorage control. In contrast, compared with the Roth appliances, the PASS appliances without any auxiliary anchorage devices could make full use of physiological anchorage to achieve adequate control of molar anchorage. Clinical orthodontists may need to pay extra attention to physiological anchorage. The difference in torque control varies depending on the respective characteristics of bracket designs. •The Tweed edgewise appliances offer superior molar anchorage control.•The PASS appliances achieve similar anchorage control efficacy as the Roth appliances.•Torque control differences depend on bracket design characteristics.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Cephalometry</subject><subject>Child</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Imaging, Three-Dimensional - methods</subject><subject>Incisor</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Malocclusion, Angle Class II - therapy</subject><subject>Maxilla</subject><subject>Orthodontic Anchorage Procedures - instrumentation</subject><subject>Orthodontic Anchorage Procedures - methods</subject><subject>Orthodontic Appliance Design</subject><subject>Orthodontic Wires</subject><subject>Tooth Movement Techniques - instrumentation</subject><subject>Tooth Movement Techniques - methods</subject><subject>Torque</subject><issn>0889-5406</issn><issn>1097-6752</issn><issn>1097-6752</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2025</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kM1u3CAUhVHVqJmmfYJKEctu7F7Mj_Eii2iapCNF6iZdIwxMwggbB-wZ9e3LZJIsu-FypXPu0fkQ-kagJkDEj12td9HGuoGG1dDVAPwDWhHo2kq0vPmIViBlV3EG4hx9znkHAB1r4BM6px0jDRNihQ43ex0WPfvxEevRPMWkH135WTzH9Lw4bOI4pxiwH7G2Mbhs3DjjqTjKzPjg5ye8DjpnvNngn37vs48jJnjQIRoTlpdVD7Hcp1hPU_AlxuUv6GyrQ3ZfX-cF-nN787D-Vd3_vtusr-8rQzgT1fFxQlJBLZdbaphkckscs4LL3jaSmwZErzshLG8J6a3uheStNZSBdQ7oBfp-ujulWOrkWQ2-VAhBjy4uWVFCWpDQyKOUnqQmxZyT26op-UGnv4qAOhJXO_VCXB2JK-hUIV5cl68BSz84--55Q1wEVyeBKzX33iWVTWFnnPXJmVnZ6P8b8A9wrJOS</recordid><startdate>202502</startdate><enddate>202502</enddate><creator>Chen, Huanhuan</creator><creator>Song, Guangying</creator><creator>Fan, Yi</creator><creator>Jiang, Jiuhui</creator><creator>Jiang, Ruoping</creator><creator>Zhang, Xiaoyun</creator><creator>Chen, Gui</creator><creator>Su, Hong</creator><creator>Wang, Tianyi</creator><creator>Han, Bing</creator><creator>Xu, Tianmin</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202502</creationdate><title>Evaluating anchorage and torque control in adolescent patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion among 3 appliances</title><author>Chen, Huanhuan ; Song, Guangying ; Fan, Yi ; Jiang, Jiuhui ; Jiang, Ruoping ; Zhang, Xiaoyun ; Chen, Gui ; Su, Hong ; Wang, Tianyi ; Han, Bing ; Xu, Tianmin</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1546-1546e68363d58f3c4848f1e4d658bd285c206ba966d5711bdab6857dc340dee03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2025</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Cephalometry</topic><topic>Child</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Imaging, Three-Dimensional - methods</topic><topic>Incisor</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Malocclusion, Angle Class II - therapy</topic><topic>Maxilla</topic><topic>Orthodontic Anchorage Procedures - instrumentation</topic><topic>Orthodontic Anchorage Procedures - methods</topic><topic>Orthodontic Appliance Design</topic><topic>Orthodontic Wires</topic><topic>Tooth Movement Techniques - instrumentation</topic><topic>Tooth Movement Techniques - methods</topic><topic>Torque</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chen, Huanhuan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Song, Guangying</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fan, Yi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jiang, Jiuhui</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jiang, Ruoping</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Xiaoyun</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Gui</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Su, Hong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Tianyi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Han, Bing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xu, Tianmin</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chen, Huanhuan</au><au>Song, Guangying</au><au>Fan, Yi</au><au>Jiang, Jiuhui</au><au>Jiang, Ruoping</au><au>Zhang, Xiaoyun</au><au>Chen, Gui</au><au>Su, Hong</au><au>Wang, Tianyi</au><au>Han, Bing</au><au>Xu, Tianmin</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluating anchorage and torque control in adolescent patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion among 3 appliances</atitle><jtitle>American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics</jtitle><addtitle>Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop</addtitle><date>2025-02</date><risdate>2025</risdate><volume>167</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>166</spage><epage>176</epage><pages>166-176</pages><issn>0889-5406</issn><issn>1097-6752</issn><eissn>1097-6752</eissn><abstract>The objective of this study was to compare the differences in anchorage and torque control among the Tweed edgewise, Roth, and physiological anchorage Spee-wire systems (PASS) appliances (Zhejiang Xinya Technology Co, Ltd, Hangzhou, China). A sample of 90 adolescent patients with Angle Class II Division 1 malocclusion (30 Tweed edgewise appliances, 30 Roth appliances, and 30 PASS appliances) with maximum anchorage requirements in the maxilla were collected for this study. The pretreatment baseline levels of the 3 groups were compared initially, and then the differences between the 3 appliances in anchorage and torque control were analyzed after superimposing the pretreatment and posttreatment lateral cephalograms and maxillary 3-dimensional (3D) digital models, respectively. There was no statistical difference in the pretreatment baseline levels of 3 groups, including gender, age, sagittal skeletal types (ANB), vertical skeletal types (SN-GoGn), anchorage requirements, and occlusal plane inclination (SN-OP). After superimposing the pretreatment and posttreatment lateral cephalograms and 3D digital models, respectively, no statistical differences were observed between the measurement results obtained from lateral cephalograms and 3D digital models. Among the measurement variables assessed in this study, statistical differences were observed in the mesial displacement of maxillary first molars, the incisor retraction, and the torque variation of maxillary central incisors among the 3 groups. Specifically, the Tweed group exhibited lower mesial displacement of maxillary first molars compared with the PASS and Roth groups. Furthermore, the Tweed group exhibited the greatest amount of incisor retraction and torque variation of maxillary central incisors, followed by the Roth group and then the PASS group. The remaining measurement variables for the 3 groups showed no statistical differences, including vertical variation of maxillary first molars and central incisors, torque variation of maxillary first molars and canines, mesiodistal inclination variation of maxillary first molars and canines, width variation between maxillary first molars, and width variation between maxillary canines. Compared with contemporary preadjusted straight wire appliances, the Tweed edgewise appliance has superiority in molar anchorage control. In contrast, compared with the Roth appliances, the PASS appliances without any auxiliary anchorage devices could make full use of physiological anchorage to achieve adequate control of molar anchorage. Clinical orthodontists may need to pay extra attention to physiological anchorage. The difference in torque control varies depending on the respective characteristics of bracket designs. •The Tweed edgewise appliances offer superior molar anchorage control.•The PASS appliances achieve similar anchorage control efficacy as the Roth appliances.•Torque control differences depend on bracket design characteristics.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>39412466</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ajodo.2024.09.005</doi><tpages>11</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0889-5406
ispartof American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics, 2025-02, Vol.167 (2), p.166-176
issn 0889-5406
1097-6752
1097-6752
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_3117080280
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Adolescent
Cephalometry
Child
Female
Humans
Imaging, Three-Dimensional - methods
Incisor
Male
Malocclusion, Angle Class II - therapy
Maxilla
Orthodontic Anchorage Procedures - instrumentation
Orthodontic Anchorage Procedures - methods
Orthodontic Appliance Design
Orthodontic Wires
Tooth Movement Techniques - instrumentation
Tooth Movement Techniques - methods
Torque
title Evaluating anchorage and torque control in adolescent patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion among 3 appliances
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-07T19%3A07%3A33IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluating%20anchorage%20and%20torque%20control%20in%20adolescent%20patients%20with%20Class%20II%20Division%201%20malocclusion%20among%203%20appliances&rft.jtitle=American%20journal%20of%20orthodontics%20and%20dentofacial%20orthopedics&rft.au=Chen,%20Huanhuan&rft.date=2025-02&rft.volume=167&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=166&rft.epage=176&rft.pages=166-176&rft.issn=0889-5406&rft.eissn=1097-6752&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ajodo.2024.09.005&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3117080280%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3117080280&rft_id=info:pmid/39412466&rft_els_id=S0889540624003822&rfr_iscdi=true